Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2024 Mar 28;19(3):e0300417. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300417

Suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals of Harari regional state, eastern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study

Tilahun Bete 1,*, Tilahun Ali 1, Tadesse Misgana 1, Abraham Negash 2, Teklu Abraham 4, Dekeba Teshome 4, Addisu Sirtsu 3, Kabtamu Nigussie 1, Abdulkerim Amano 1
Editor: Chalachew Kassaw Demoze5
PMCID: PMC10977762  PMID: 38547179

Abstract

Background

Suicide is a global issue. It is the third responsible for death among the reproductive age group. Pregnancy is a complicated event and crucial in the life of a woman with considerable physiological, hormonal changes, social, and mental changes. However, third-world countries like Ethiopia have not been investigated well. Therefore, the study planned to assess the magnitude and factors associated with suicidal ideation. Furthermore, it will identify the role of hyperemesis gravidarum on suicidal ideation.

Method

A Cross-sectional study was employed for 543 pregnant participants attending antenatal care at Hiwot Fana Specialized University Hospital and Jugal General Hospital, Harari regional state, eastern Ethiopia from June 1 to August 1, 2022. The recruited participants were selected by systematic random sampling method. Suicide was assessed using Composite International Diagnostic by interview methods data collection. Epi data and STATA version 14.1 were used for data entry and analysis respectively. Candidate variables were entered into a multivariate logistic regression then those variables that have p-value < 0.05 were considered as significantly associated.

Results

The magnitude of suicidal ideation in this study was found to be 11.15% at (95% CI: 8.75–14.11). Regarding the associated factor, unwanted pregnancy (AOR = 3.39: at 95% CI = 1.58–7.27), Hyperemesis gravidarum (AOR = 3.65: at 95% CI = 1.81–7.34), having depressive symptoms (AOR = 2.79: at 95% CI = 1.49–5.23), having anxiety symptoms (AOR = 3.37; at 95% CI = 1.69–6.68), experiencing intimate partner violence (AOR = 2.88: at 95% CI = 1.11–7.46), and having stress (AOR = 3.46; at 95% CI = 1.75–6.86) were significantly associated variable with suicidal ideation among pregnant women.

Conclusion and recommendation

This study revealed that suicidal ideation is common among pregnant women. Regarding the associated factors unwanted pregnancy, hyperemesis gravidarum, having depressive and anxiety symptoms, experiencing intimate partner violence, and stress were significantly associated with suicidal ideation. Thus, giving awareness and early screening and interferences for antenatal suicide should be warranted.

Background

Suicide is a fatal act of terminating one’s own life and it is a behavior characterized by thinking or putting personal life at risk of killing oneself [1]. It is a complex process that is classified into three categories: suicidal plan, ideation, and attempt [2]. Suicide ideation (SI) refers to the thought of trying to end one’s life with a non-fatal consequence and aiding as the cause of one’s death [3] According to a report by WHO, more than 800,000 individuals pass away by suicide, and 20 million attempt suicide annually. It is responsible for 1.4% of deaths, ranking as the 15th top root of death. In sub-Saharan countries, it is underreported. Only 10% of countries report suicide mortality data [46].

Pregnancy is a crucial and complicated event in the woman`s life with considerable physiological, hormonal changes, social, and mental changes [7, 8]. Hyperemesis gravidarum is not a sign of an underlying psychiatric illness but, it is one of a complex condition that occurs during pregnancy characterized by severe, recurrent episodes of nausea and vomiting developed before the end of the 22nd week of gestational age [9]. Nearly 10% of pregnant mothers with HG continue until the third trimester or throughout the pregnancy [10]. It is a diagnosis of exclusion that is explained by positive ketonuria, persistent nausea, and vomiting, which leads to dehydration, weight loss, and failure to eat and drink normally among pregnant women [11, 12]. The exact cause of HG is not known but some scholars hypothesized that the size increase in placental mass, and hormonal changes during pregnancy [13].

Various studies have reported that hyperemesis gravidarum can associated with suicide. Hyperemesis gravidarum is also one of the predisposing factors for depression, anxiety, and psychological problems [1416]. These are in turn accountable for more than 90% of suicides [17]. The mechanism of the association between hyperemesis gravidarum and suicide is not fully understood but hypothetically suggested that it is linked with an increment of reproductive hormones like estrogen and progesterone [18, 19] and these hormones are linked to emotional disturbance like depression [20, 21].

Pregnant women suffering from SI. In psychiatry health service around 3–14% are emergency cases [22, 23]. The magnitude of SI in pregnant women is high compared to the general population [24]. Globally suicide is the third leading cause of death among reproductive age particularly among pregnant [25]. It is also one of the reasons for the death of mothers during the perinatal time and a considerable basis of maternal deaths in the perinatal period [26] and one-third of all female patients hospitalized following a suicide attempt [2729]. In developing countries, it is a main problem for death [8]. The evidence suggested that 1.0–1.7% of pregnancy-related deaths reported in low-income families are indorsed due to suicide [30].

The existing few studies in low and middle-income countries indicate that the magnitude of suicidal ideation ranged between 1.7% -27.5% [24, 28, 3135]. Being impulsivity in behavior, having a family history of suicide, having a previous diagnosis of psychiatric illness [36, 37], having a comorbid mental illness, particularly diagnosis of depression, anxiety, substance use especially alcohol use [38, 39], unwanted and unplanned pregnancy, induced pregnancy, being unemployment, violence between partner, being young, and having poor social support [4043] were identified factors for suicidal ideation in both high and low-middle income countries.

The outcome of the study has paramount significance in providing the magnitude of suicidal ideation and associated factors, in identifying the role of hyperemesis gravidarum on suicidal ideation. It is also used as a foundation for concerned bodies who are designed to screen and intervene in suicide since antenatal care is a good chance among pregnant [4447]. Despite being pregnant being a major risk of having suicidal ideation, there is no study done on the magnitude of the problem in the Eastern part of Ethiopia. The study also identifies the role of hyperemesis gravidarum on suicide in pregnancy. Therefore, the study aimed to figure out the current magnitude of suicidal ideation and its associated factors in the study area.

Methods

Study area, design, and period

An institutional-based Cross-sectional study design was conducted. The study was employed in two public hospitals in the Harari region, located 525 KM away from Addis Ababa. In the region, there are 2 public hospitals namely Hiwot Fana Specialized University Hospital and Jugal General Hospital. Hiwot Fana Specialized University Hospital is one of the main academic referral centers in eastern Ethiopia, serving a population of over 5 million people. Currently, the hospital has about 201 beds and 12 case teams to provide referral inpatient and outpatient services to residents of the Harari region and nearby regions. According to hospital records, 10,000 pregnant women attend ANC follow-up each year. Jegula Hospital is the first hospital founded in Harar town. The hospital contains 7 wards and 9 OPD with 347 clinical staff.

The study was carried out from June 1 to August 1, 2022.

Population

Source population

All pregnant women attending antenatal care service in public hospitals of Harari regional state, eastern Ethiopia.

Study population

All pregnant women attending antenatal care services in public hospitals of Harari regional state who were available during the study period.

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

All pregnant women who were attending ANC service at public hospitals during the study were included in this study.

Exclusion criteria

Pregnant women who were acutely ill and unable to communicate were excluded from this study. In addition to this, those mothers with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to other medical conditions such as thyroid diseases and liver diseases were excluded from the study after proven investigation.

Sample size determination and sampling technique

A single population proportion formula was used to estimate the sample size. The magnitude of suicidal ideation among pregnant women was taken from a previous study which was conducted in southern Ethiopia Jimma, which was 13.3% [33] and by taking a margin of error of 0.03, standard normal distribution Zα/2 = 1.96, and non-response rate of 10%. Our final sample size was 543.

A systematic sampling technique was used to recruit participants. The average number of pregnant women who attend antenatal care at the public Hospital of Harari regional state is 1224 per month. The sample was proportionally allocated using the monthly average number of overall pregnant women attending ANC from the registration book for each hospital to make it representative. Systematic random sampling was used to select study subjects from each hospital. The interval size (k) is calculated using the following formula. k=Nn = 2448/543 = 4.5 ≈4. So every four persons was selected from each hospital. The first pregnant woman was selected from the first four by lottery method and had to follow up during the data collection period.

Operational definitions

Pregnant women; women who tested positive for HCG test [48] and USG examination [49].

Hyperemesis gravidarum

Women who tested positive for ketonuria and had experienced prolonged nausea and vomiting [50].

Suicidal ideation

Women who gave “yes” responses to suicidal ideation during the pregnancy period were considered as having suicidal ideation [51].

Sleep quality

Women who scored PSQI ≤ 5 were considered to have good sleep quality and scored>5 as poor sleep quality [52].

Depression

Participants who scored on DASS-21 “≥10” are declared as having depressive symptoms [53].

Anxiety

Participants who scored on DASS-21 “≥8” are considered as having anxiety symptoms [53].

Stress

Participants who scored on DASS-21 “≥15” are declared as having stress, [53].

Intimate partner violence

Expresses physical violence, sexual violence, and emotional aggression by their intimate partner [54].

Social support was measured by using the Oslo social support measuring tool. It is a 3-item questionnaire that was used to assess social support. It has a total score of 3–14 with three categories. Poor “3–8”, moderate “9–11”, and strong social support “12–14” [55].

Those pregnant women who used at least one of the specified substances (alcohol, khat, tobacco,) for non-medical purposes in the last 3 months were considered positive for current substance use [56].

Gestational age/stage was defined as the pregnancy stage that is categorized as first, second, and third trimester if the duration of pregnancy was 1–3 months, 4–6 months, and 7 months and more, respectively.

Data collection instruments and procedure

A structured interviewer-administered questionnaire was used and the data was collected through face-to-face interviewing. The questionnaire content includes socio-demographic questions, obstetrics-related conditions, clinical-related factors, psychosocial factors, substance-related factors, psychiatric-related factors, and suicidal ideation questions of the pregnant mothers(S1 Dataset).

The Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21) is a set of three self-report scales designed to measure the emotional states of depression, anxiety, and stress. Each of the three DASS-21 scales contains 7 items, divided into subscales with similar content. Recommended cut-off scores for conventional severity labels as normal, moderate, severe, and extremely severe. Each item contributes 0 to 3 points to the sum score, then scores on the DASS-21 were multiplied by 2 to calculate the final score [53]. Various studies demonstrated that the DASS-21 was found to have strong internal consistency with Cronbach’s α coefficient ranging from 0.74 to 0.86 for anxiety, 0.77 to 0.92 for depression, and 0.70 to 0.90 for stress [5759]. In the current study kappa value was 0.91.

Current substance use was assessed by using the adopted version of the WHO (2010) ‘Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST), at least one of a specific substance for non-medical purposes within the last 3 months [56]. The average test–retest reliability coefficients (kappas) of ASSIST ranged from a high of 0.90 to a low of 0.58. The average kappas for substance classes ranged from 0.61 for sedatives to 0.78 for opioids. In general, the reliabilities were in the range of good to excellent [60].

Suicidal ideation was assessed using the World Health Organization (WHO) composite international diagnostic interview (CIDI) assessment tool [51]. The tool assesses the suicidal attempt, plan, ideation, and method of attempt. The tool is widely used in Ethiopia among pregnant women and chronic medical illnesses [6164]. The Amharic version is validated in Ethiopia with percent agreement and kappa ranging from 92.5%-100% and 0.78–1.00, respectively [6365]. In the current study kappa value was 0.88.

The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was used to assess sleep quality during pregnancy. The tool has 19 questions that are classified into seven categories [66, 67]. Each category has a score of zero to three and the total score ranges from 0–21 [68]. Individuals who score more than five from the total can be considered as poor sleep quality. The tool has a specificity of 86.5% and a sensitivity of 89.6% [52].

Social support was assessed by the Oslo Social Support Scale. The scale has 3 questions that ranged from a minimum score of 3 to a maximum score of 14. Those individuals who scored “3–8” were Poor, “9–11” moderate, and “12–14” were considered as they have strong social support [55]. In the current study, the internal consistency of OSSS-3 was accepted with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.81.

Abuse Assessment Screen (AAS) was used to measure Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). The tool is one of the most valid and widely used IPV screening tools in the pregnant population with a sensitivity of 93–94% and specificity of 55–99%. Pregnant mothers who responded to the questions were considered as having been abused [54].

Laboratory investigations were performed for those participants suspected of underlying medical conditions such as thyroid disease (sent for T3, T4, and TSH) and liver disease (sent for liver function test). Information about Hyperemesis gravidarum and gestational age were taken from the medical chart of the patients as defined as a woman who tested positive for ketonuria and had experienced prolonged nausea and vomiting, and the pregnancy stage that is categorized as first, second, and third trimester, respectively.

Data quality control

The data was collected by four psychiatric nursing professionals. To ensure the quality of data, training was given to data collectors regarding data collection methods, data collection tools, and how to handle ethical issues. Then the data was collected through face-to-face interviewing of a volunteer pregnant woman attending ANC in public hospitals and questionnaires adopted from WHO that include a tool for diagnostic evaluation of suicidal ideation were used. Each section of the questionnaires was translated from English to local languages, Amharic and Afaan Oromo, by the language expert and then it was translated back to English for internal consistency. All the materials and equipment were adequately controlled and a pre-test was done on 5% of the total sample size of 27 pregnant women. Regular supervision by the supervisor and principal investigator was made to ensure that all necessary data were appropriately collected.

Data processing and analysis

The collected data were checked for completeness and consistency, then it was coded, entered into the Epi-Data version 3.1 software, and then exported to the Stata version 14.1 for cleaning and analysis. On bivariate analysis factors with a p-value, less than 0.25 and clinical factors were considered to have an association with the outcome variable. Then multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors that were independently associated with the outcome variable. The assumption of Multicollinearity was checked by calculating Variance Inflation Factors and there were no problems with multicollinearity identified (no VIF > 10). Additionally, the outlier was checked by calculating residuals and addressed based on the impact of them. The model goodness of fit was checked by Hosmer and Lemeshow test which resulted in 0.68. Then, variables that show statistical significance associated with a p-value less than 0.05 in the multivariate logistic regression analysis were declared to be independent predictors of suicidal ideation.

Ethics statement

All procedures performed in the study were with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and the Helsinki Declaration of 1964. Before the study began ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Health Research Ethics Review Committee (IHRERC) of the College of Health and Medical Sciences of Haramaya University with reference number of IHRERC /069/2022. The college sent a letter of cooperation to public hospitals and a written and signed informed consent was obtained from the head of the institutions before starting the data collection. From all of the participants and their parents/legal guardians informed, voluntary, written, and signed consent was obtained that declared their agreement to participate in the study. For the minor participants informed, voluntary, written, and signed consent was obtained from their parents/guardians. The information from individual mothers was kept confidential, their identity will not be shown and there will be no dissemination of the information without the respondent’s permission. A private room for an interview was prepared; those women who reported suicidal ideation were immediately linked to the psychiatric outpatient department for further evaluation and management. Interviewers were trained to link participants found to be in physically risky conditions and/or in immediate need of counseling to psychologists and psychiatrists. During the data collection COVID-19 prevention protocol was taken action like wearing face masks, maintaining physical distance, and using hand sanitizers, which was being practiced by health professionals in the health care setting as a safety measure.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics of participants

In this study, a total of 538 participants were involved, with an overall 99.07% response rate. The mean age of the participants was 26.53 years with ± 4.48 standard deviation. Of all respondents, 223(41.45%) were between the ages of 25 and 29 years and 314 (58.36%) were Muslim by religion. Regarding occupational status, nearly half of the participants 233 (43.31%) were housewives and 202(37.55%) attended Elementary School. Most of the participant, 462 (85.87%), lives in an urban area (Table 1).

Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals in Harari region, eastern Ethiopia, 2022 (N = 538).

Variables Categories Frequency (N) Percent (%)
Age < 20 years 27 5.02
20–24 years 152 28.25
25–29 years 223 41.43
> 29 years 136 25.28
Marital status Married 519 96.47
Unmarried 19 3.53
Religion Muslim 314 58.36
Orthodox 178 33.09
Protestant 45 8.36
Catholic 1 0.19
Educational status Informal education 51 9.48
Elementary 202 37.55
Secondary 152 28.25
Diploma and above 133 24.72
Occupational status Government employed 77 14.31
Private 157 29.18
Farmer 42 7.81
Student 29 5.39
Housewife 233 43.31
Residence Rural 76 14.13
Urban 462 85.87

Clinically related factors and characteristics of the participants

Of all the participants, more than half of participants 313 (58.18%) were in their third trimester and 293 (54.46%) were multipara. More than one-tenth of participants 62 (11.52%) informed that the present pregnancy was unwanted and around 82 (15.24%) of them had experienced hyperemesis gravidarum. Only three of the respondents had a previous history of psychiatric illness, and one-third of the participants 176 (32.71%) have a family history of mental illness. Around 79 (14.68%) had a family history of suicidal attempts. One-third of them 181(33.64%) had a comorbid chronic medical illness. Of the participants, 138 (25.65%), 100 (18.59%), and 159 (29.55%) had depressive, anxiety, and stress symptoms during their pregnancy respectively (Table 2).

Table 2. Obstetrics-related characteristics of pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals in Harari region, eastern Ethiopia, 2022 (N = 538).

Variables Categories Frequency (N) Percent (%)
Pregnancy by trimester First trimester 18 3.35
Second trimester 207 38.48
Third trimester 313 58.18
Parity Nullipara 123 22.86
Primipara 122 22.68
Multipara 293 54.46
History of abortion Yes 67 12.45
No 471 87.55
Abortion intention in the current pregnancy Yes 12 2.23
No 526 97.77
Current pregnancy status wanted Yes 62 11.52
No 476 88.48
Hyperemesis Gravidraum Yes 82 15.24
No 456 84.76
Previous mental illness history No 535 99.44
Yes 3 0.56
Family history of mental illness Yes 176 32.71
No 362 67.29
Family history of suicidal attempt Yes 79 14.68
No 459 85.32
Chronic medical illness Yes 181 33.64
No 357 66.36
Depressive symptoms Yes 138 25.65
No 400 74.35
Anxiety symptoms Yes 100 18.59
No 438 71.41
Stress Yes 159 29.55
No 379 70.45
Sleep Quality Poor 234 43.49
Good 304 56.51

Psychosocial and substance-related factors of the participants

Related to social support, more than one-third 193 (35.87%) of the respondents had strong, 185 (34.39%) had moderate and 160 (29.74%) had poor social support, and nearly one-tenth 48(8.92%) of the defendants experienced IPV. Before three months of this study, 134 (24.91%) of the participants used substances, Of them, 39 (7.25%) chewed khat, 54 (10.04%) drank alcohol, and 22 (4.02%) smoked cigarettes (Table 3).

Table 3. Psychosocial and substance-related factors of pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals in Harari region, eastern Ethiopia, 2022 (N = 538).

Variables Categories Frequency (N) Percent (%)
Social support Poor social support 160 29.74
Moderate social support 185 34.39
Strong social support 193 35.87
Intimate partner violent Yes 48 8.92
No 490 91.08
Overall Current substance user Yes 134 24.91
No 404 75.19
Current Khat use Current Khat use 39 7.25
Not Current Khat use 499 92.65
Current alcohol use Current alcohol use 54 10.04
Not Current alcohol use 484 89.96
Current cigarette use Current cigarette use 22 4.09
Not current cigarette use 516 95.91

The magnitude of suicidal ideation among the pregnant women

More than one-tenth of respondents 60 (11.15%) at 95% CI (8.75–14.11) of the pregnant women were reported to have suicide ideation and 20 (3.72%) had suicidal attempts during pregnancy in the past month (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Distribution of suicidal ideation among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals in Harari region, eastern Ethiopia, 2022.

Fig 1

Factors associated with suicidal ideation among pregnant women

Bi-variable logistic analysis was done to see factors associated with suicidal ideation; Hence, age, unwanted pregnancy, family history of mental illness and suicide, history of chronic medical illness, hyperemesis gravidarum, intimate partner violence, depression, anxiety, stress, social support, and poor sleep quality, and were chosen as candidate variables for multivariate analysis by considering a p-value and clinical factors. Out of those variables treated under multivariate logistic regression analysis, unwanted pregnancy, having depressive, and anxiety symptoms, stress, having intimate partner violence, and hyperemesis gravidarum were significantly associated with suicidal ideation at a p-value <0.05.

Pregnant women who had unwanted pregnancies were 3.39 times [AOR = 3.39(95% CI = 1.58–7.27)] more likely to develop suicidal ideation than those who wanted their current pregnancy. Pregnant women with Hyperemesis gravidarum were about 3.65 times more likely to have suicidal ideation compared to those who had no hyperemesis gravidarum [AOR = 3.65; (95%CI = 1.81–7.34)]. The odds of having suicidal ideation for a pregnant mother with depressive symptoms were 2.79 times more likely than a pregnant mother without depressive symptoms (AOR = 2.79; 95% CI = 1.49–5.23). Similarly, pregnant women who had anxiety symptoms were 3.37 times (AOR = 3.37; 95% CI = 1.69–6.68) more likely to develop suicidal ideation than those who had no anxiety symptoms. Pregnant women who experienced intimate partner violence and stress during pregnancy are 3.46 and 2.88 more likely to have suicidal ideation than those who haven’t experienced respectively (Table 4).

Table 4. Bivariate and multivariate binary logistic regression of factors associated with suicidal behavior among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals in Harari region, eastern Ethiopia, 2022 (N = 538).

Variables Category Suicidal Ideation COR (95% CI) AOR (95% CI) P-values
Yes No
Age < 20 3 24 1.18(0.31–4.47) 0.63(0.13–3.08) 0.663
20–24 17 135 1.19(0.56–2.55) 0.88(0.18–4.15) 0.867
25–29 27 196 1.13(0.65–2.62) 0.54(0.11–2.71) 0.450
>29 13 123 1 1 1
Current pregnancy wanted unwanted 16 46 3.42(1.79–6.53) 3.39(1.58–7.27) 0.002
Wanted 44 432 1 1 1
Family history of mental illness Yes 23 153 1.32(.76–2.29) 1.33(0.56–3.13) 0.517
No 37 325 1 1 1
Family history of suicide Yes 6 73 0.62(0.26–1.49) 0.55(0.21–1.45) 0.225
No 54 405 1 1 1
History of chronic medical illness Yes 21 160 1.07(0.61–1.88) 1.06(0.48–2.37) 0.879
No 39 318 1 1 1
HyperemsisGravidam Yes 23 59 4.41(2.45–7.94) 3.65(1.81–7.34) <0.001
No 37 419 1 1 1
Social support Poor 24 136 1.83(.94–3.54) 1.53 (0.71–3.29) 0.278
Moderate 19 166 1.18(0.59–2.36) 1.02(0.44–2.37) 0.955
Strong 17 176 1 1 1
Depression Yes 34 104 4.70(2.69–8.19) 2.79(1.49–5.23) 0.001
No 26 374 1 1 1
Anxiety Yes 24 76 3.53(1.99–6.25) 3.37(1.69–6.68) <0.001
No 36 402 1 1 1
Stress Yes 30 129 2.70(1.57–4.66) 3.46(1.75–6.86) <0.001
No 30 349 1 1 1
Sleep quality Poor 34 200 1.82(1.06–3.13) 1.26(0.66–2.39) 0.479
Good 26 278 1 1 1
Intimate partner violence Yes 11 37 2.68(1.28–5.58) 2.88(1.11–7.46) 0.029
No 49 471 1 1 1

*COR- Crudes odds ratio, AOD- Adjusted odds ratio, CI- Confidence Interval, 1 –reference

Discussions

This study is intended to determine the magnitude and associated factors of suicidal ideation among pregnant women at public hospitals in the Harari regional state and it shows the scope of the problem in the study area. The finding of this study revealed that the magnitude of suicidal ideation found to be 11.11% (95% CI: 8.75–14.11). Regarding the associated factors unwanted pregnancy, hyperemesis gravidarum, experiencing IPV, having depressive and anxiety symptoms, and stress were identified variables that have significant association with suicidal ideation among pregnant women.

The finding of this study (11.11%) is in line with the studies conducted in Southern Ethiopia Gedeo zone 9.3% [69], Southwest Ethiopia Jimma 13.3% [33], Pakistani 11.8% [70], and Peru 8.8% [71]. But this finding is higher than the studies conducted in India 6% [72], and Brazil 6.3% [73]. The variation might be related to the tool difference used to assess suicidal ideation, the participants’ period of pregnancy (trimester), and socioeconomic status variation. This study used CIDI whereas the previous studies used the, revised suicidal behavior questionnaire (SBQ-R) [72], and Self-Report Questionnaire-20 [73], and all of them have different accuracy levels in assessing suicide ideation. For instance, the study conducted in Brazil used the suicidal part of SRQ-20 which included nine questions, and of this suicidal behavior was evaluated by one question that may lead to a decrease the attention and concentration for the question. The other reason for the variation might be the difference in the inclusion criteria of participants. The Indian study includes pregnant women with a gestational age between five weeks to 20 weeks and excludes those mothers who had a previous history of mental illness and who are using psychoactive substances use which may decrease the prevalence, while this study includes all pregnant women except acutely ill [24, 72, 74]. On top of that, socioeconomic status variation may additionally contribute to the difference in the prevalence of suicide ideation.

On the opposite side, the finding is lower than from studies done in Brazil which was a cross-sectional study that reported the magnitude of suicidal ideation 23.53% [75], the epidemiological study conducted in Egypt reported that the magnitude of SI 20.4% [76], and Peru’s study 16.8% [77]. The discrepancy might be due to the tool used to assess SI. This study used CIDI while previous studies used the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders, and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) which measure suicide ideation in 1 week, 30 days, and 15 days, respectively. Another reason might be the difference in inclusion and exclusion criteria. The previous studies exclude pregnant mothers who have a previous history of psychiatric disorder or substance use, and they include pregnant mothers with only who are married and with a gestational age of between 20–40 weeks, while the current study included all pregnant mothers. Another reason might be the socio-demographic and cultural differences and religious roles in which they give meaning to suicide. For example in Ethiopia, the religious leader teaches suicide is forbidden and it is considered as sin. Additionally, most communities in developing countries including Ethiopia consider reporting suicide as not a culturally acceptable and stigmatizing issue, so this could be a possible reason for the low prevalence of suicidal behavior in our study compared to studies done in other countries.

Regarding the associated factors, the odds of having suicidal ideation is 3.65 more likely to occur among pregnant mothers who are diagnosed with hyperemesis gravidarum than those mothers who aren’t diagnosed with hyperemesis gravidarum. This is supported by studies done in the United Kingdom [14], Canada [15], and Egypt [78]. Hyperemesis gravidarum disrupts individuals and family life, causing impairment in social and occupational functioning and loss of job. This in turn may cause thoughts of suicide. In another way, Hyperemesis gravidarum, as a physical stressor, may predispose individuals to depression and anxiety [79, 80], again the anxiety and depression may lead individuals to the thought of suicide [81].

This study pointed out that the odds of having suicidal ideation were 6.3 times more likely to occur among unwanted pregnancies compared to wanting one. This finding agrees with previous studies in Brazil [73] and Ethiopia [34]. This might be because the women with an unwanted pregnancy may not be ready to take the responsibility to give birth and to handle the child and they may be dependent economically on their family so due to this reason they may be stressed and think of ending their life. Another justification might be if the sexual partner does not accept, and support the pregnancy it is stress for the pregnant mother that leads them to end their life. In addition to this pregnancy that happened due to sudden forced sexual abuse may result in a crisis for mothers even wanting to end their lives [34].

The finding of this study shows that depressive symptoms were identified as a predicted variable for suicidal ideation for pregnant women. The finding agrees with the findings of Ethiopia Jimma [33], Brazil [73, 75], India [72], and Egypt [76]. The main reason for this could be, that depression is one of the main responsible factors for suicide. Mothers who have depression have hopelessness, decreased need for interest, and internal feelings of sadness, and guilt which lead them to think of ending their lives. Another justification might be the depletion of serotonin and epinephrine in depression has a direct association with suicidal thoughts through loss of concentration and impairment of judgment, since suicide is a good judgment for poor decision-making individuals [71].

This study suggested that pregnant mothers who are living with anxiety symptoms have more suicidal ideation than those who have no anxiety symptoms. The finding is similar to the previous studies of South Africa [24], Egypt [76], Pakistani [70], and Brazil [82] Pregnancy is a dual life and a very sensitive period. At this time pregnant women become stressed, anxious, and worried about their pregnancy, their child, losing their body shape, taking responsibility, and worrying about the complications of pregnancy in their lives. So all these factors are a potential cause of suicide [75].

Another finding from this study is the odds of having suicidal ideation during pregnancy were 2.43 times occur among mothers who had experienced IPV than those who didn’t. The result agrees with the previous studies of Brazil [73, 75], India [72] South Africa [24], and Pakistani [70]. The possible implication for this might be IPV could be the threats of an action that can physical, sexual, verbal, psychological, and emotional violence that can occur either at a private level or at a public leads them to suicide [83, 84]. The finding of the study also showed that women who have stress were 2.88 times more likely to have suicidal ideation as compared to those women who didn’t have stress. This is similar to the study done in Ethiopia, Jimma [33]. The implication for this might be the hormonal changes during pregnancy may cause changes in behavior, in mood, and may fear and worry for the future [33, 43, 85].

Strengths and limitations of the study

The strength of the study was including a relatively large sample size and used standardized tools. This study has some limitations. Due to the nature of a cross-sectional study design, we could not explore the cause-and-effect relationships between suicide and the independent variables. Second, a face-to-face interview method might induce recall bias and social desirability response bias. This was attempted to be reduced by conducting an anonymous survey, ensuring confidentiality, use of self-administered for those literate, and framing questions in a non-threatening and non-judgmental manner.

Conclusion and recommendation

This study revealed that suicidal ideation among pregnant women was found to be a common problem. Regarding the associated factors unwanted pregnancy, hyperemesis gravidarum, experiencing IPV, having depressive and anxiety symptoms, and stress were identified variables that are found to be significantly associated with suicidal ideation among pregnant women. This suggests the need to strengthen the awareness of suicidal behaviors and the need to evaluate the effectiveness of the national health strategy in addressing suicidal behaviors among pregnant women. Additionally, providing integrated mental health services during ANC is needed to reduce coexisting mental disorders including suicide during pregnancy. Interventions targeted among pregnant women who had a previous history of hyperemesis gravidarum, symptoms of common mental disorders, experiencing IPV, and women with unplanned pregnancies should be warranted.

Supporting information

S1 Dataset. The data set was used to determine suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women in the eastern part of Ethiopia.

(DOCX)

pone.0300417.s001.docx (35.5KB, docx)
S1 File

(SAV)

pone.0300417.s002.sav (111.3KB, sav)

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge Haramaya University for providing us with ethical clearance. In addition, we extend our thanks to our participants, supervisor, and data collectors.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and it’s supporting information files.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Niedzwiedz C, Haw C, Hawton K, Platt S. The definition and epidemiology of clusters of suicidal behavior: a systematic review. Suicide and Life‐Threatening Behavior. 2014;44(5):569–81. doi: 10.1111/sltb.12091 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Posner K, Brodsky B, Yershova K, Buchanan J, Mann J. The Classification of Suicidal Behavior. 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Harmer B, Lee S, Duong T, Saadabadi A. Suicidal ideation. 2020. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Sadock BJ, Sadock VA, Ruiz P. Comprehensive textbook of psychiatry 10th edition. United States of America: Wolters Kluwer; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Koslow SH, Ruiz P, Nemeroff CB. A concise guide to understanding suicide: epidemiology, pathophysiology and prevention: Cambridge University Press; 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Mars B, Burrows S, Hjelmeland H, Gunnell D. Suicidal behaviour across the African continent: a review of the literature. BMC public health. 2014;14(1):1–14. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-606 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Koppad S, Walvekar R, Mallapur D. Utilization of antenatal care by pregnant women residing in the Kakati sub center-a cross sectional center. Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development. 2014;5(3):160. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Vijayakumar L. Suicide in women. Indian journal of psychiatry. 2015;57(Suppl 2):S233. doi: 10.4103/0019-5545.161484 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Organization WH. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and related health problems: Alphabetical index: World Health Organization; 2004. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Gadsby R, Barnie-Adshead AM, Jagger C. A prospective study of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy. British Journal of General Practice. 1993;43(371):245–8. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Nelson-Piercy C. Treatment of nausea and vomiting in pregnancy. Drug safety. 1998;19(2):155–64. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Goodwin TM, Montoro M, Mestman JH. Transient hyperthyroidism and hyperemesis gravidarum: clinical aspects. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology. 1992;167(3):648–52. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(11)91565-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Jennings LK, Mahdy H. Hyperemesis gravidarum. 2018. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Dean C, Bannigan K, Marsden J. Reviewing the effect of hyperemesis gravidarum on women’s lives and mental health. British Journal of Midwifery. 2018;26(2):109–19. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Nana M, Tydeman F, Bevan G, Boulding H, Kavanagh K, Dean C, et al. Hyperemesis gravidarum is associated with increased rates of termination of pregnancy and suicidal ideation: results from a survey completed by> 5000 participants. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2021;224(6):629–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Nana M, Tydeman F, Bevan G, Boulding H, Kavanagh K, Dean C, et al. Termination of wanted pregnancy and suicidal ideation in hyperemesis gravidarum: A mixed methods study. Obstetric Medicine. 2022;15(3):180–4. doi: 10.1177/1753495X211040926 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Willie M. On depression and mental disorder in South Africa. Med Clin Rev. 2017;3(4):19. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Bustos M, Venkataramanan R, Caritis S. Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy—What’s new? Auton Neurosci. 2017;202:62–72. doi: 10.1016/j.autneu.2016.05.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.McCarthy FP, Khashan AS, North RA, Moss-Morris R, Baker PN, Dekker G, et al. A prospective cohort study investigating associations between hyperemesis gravidarum and cognitive, behavioural and emotional well-being in pregnancy. PloS one. 2011;6(11):e27678. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0027678 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Deurveilher S, Rusak B, Semba K. Female reproductive hormones alter sleep architecture in ovariectomized rats. Sleep. 2011;34(4):519–30. doi: 10.1093/sleep/34.4.519 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Dzaja A, Wehrle R, Lancel M, Pollmächer T. Elevated estradiol plasma levels in women with restless legs during pregnancy. Sleep. 2009;32(2):169–74. doi: 10.1093/sleep/32.2.169 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Lindahl V, Pearson JL, Colpe L. Prevalence of suicidality during pregnancy and the postpartum. Archives of Women’s Mental Health. 2005;8(2):77–87. doi: 10.1007/s00737-005-0080-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Pinheiro RT, da Cunha Coelho FM, da Silva RA, de Ávila Quevedo L, de Mattos Souza LD, Castelli RD, et al. Suicidal behavior in pregnant teenagers in southern Brazil: social, obstetric and psychiatric correlates. Journal of affective disorders. 2012;136(3):520–5. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2011.10.037 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Onah MN, Field S, Bantjes J, Honikman S. Perinatal suicidal ideation and behaviour: psychiatry and adversity. Archives of women’s mental health. 2017;20(2):321–31. doi: 10.1007/s00737-016-0706-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Mendez-Bustos P, Lopez-Castroman J, Baca-García E, Ceverino A. Life cycle and suicidal behavior among women. The Scientific World Journal. 2013;2013. doi: 10.1155/2013/485851 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Oates M. Suicide: the leading cause of maternal death. The British Journal of Psychiatry. 2003;183(4):279–81. doi: 10.1192/bjp.183.4.279 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Palladino CL, Singh V, Campbell J, Flynn H, Gold K. Homicide and suicide during the perinatal period: findings from the National Violent Death Reporting System. Obstetrics and gynecology. 2011;118(5):1056. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31823294da [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Gelaye B, Kajeepeta S, Williams MA. Suicidal ideation in pregnancy: an epidemiologic review. Archives of women’s mental health. 2016;19(5):741–51. doi: 10.1007/s00737-016-0646-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Rodriguez VJ, Mandell LN, Babayigit S, Manohar RR, Weiss SM, Jones DL. Correlates of suicidal ideation during pregnancy and postpartum among women living with HIV in rural South Africa. AIDS and Behavior. 2018;22(10):3188–97. doi: 10.1007/s10461-018-2153-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Fuhr DC, Calvert C, Ronsmans C, Chandra PS, Sikander S, De Silva MJ, et al. Contribution of suicide and injuries to pregnancy-related mortality in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Psychiatry. 2014;1(3):213–25. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(14)70282-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Benute GRG, Nomura RMY, Jorge VMF, Nonnenmacher D, Fráguas Junior R, Lucia MCSd, et al. Risk of suicide in high risk pregnancy: an exploratory study. Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira. 2011;57:583–7. doi: 10.1590/s0104-42302011000500019 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Levey EJ, Rondon MB, Sanchez S, Zhong Q-Y, Williams MA, Gelaye B. Suicide risk assessment: examining transitions in suicidal behaviors among pregnant women in Perú. Archives of women’s mental health. 2019;22(1):65–73. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Anbesaw T, Negash A, Mamaru A, Abebe H, Belete A, Ayano G. Suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Jimma medical center, Ethiopia. PLoS one. 2021;16(8):e0255746. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255746 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Belete K, Kassew T, Demilew D, Zeleke TA. Prevalence and correlates of suicide ideation and attempt among pregnant women attending antenatal care services at public hospitals in southern Ethiopia. Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment. 2021;17:1517. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S309702 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Rochat TJ, Bland RM, Tomlinson M, Stein A. Suicide ideation, depression and HIV among pregnant women in rural South Africa. Health. 2013;Vol.05No.03:12. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Oquendo MA, Halberstam B, Mann JJ. Risk factors for suicidal behavior. Standardized evaluation in clinical practice. 2003;22:103–29. [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Borges G, Nock MK, Abad JMH, Hwang I, Sampson NA, Alonso J, et al. Twelve-month prevalence of and risk factors for suicide attempts in the World Health Organization World Mental Health Surveys. The Journal of clinical psychiatry. 2010;71(12):21777. doi: 10.4088/JCP.08m04967blu [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Nock MK, Borges G, Bromet EJ, Cha CB, Kessler RC, Lee S. Suicide and suicidal behavior. Epidemiologic reviews. 2008;30(1):133–54. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxn002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Dumais A, Lesage AD, Alda M, Rouleau G, Dumont M, Chawky N, et al. Risk factors for suicide completion in major depression: a case-control study of impulsive and aggressive behaviors in men. American Journal of Psychiatry. 2005;162(11):2116–24. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.11.2116 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Bayatpour M, Wells RD, Holford S. Physical and sexual abuse as predictors of substance use and suicide among pregnant teenagers. Journal of adolescent health. 1992;13(2):128–32. doi: 10.1016/1054-139x(92)90079-q [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Bonari L, Pinto N, Ahn E, Einarson A, Steiner M, Koren G. Perinatal risks of untreated depression during pregnancy. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 2004;49(11):726–35. doi: 10.1177/070674370404901103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Gausia K, Fisher C, Ali M, Oosthuizen J. Antenatal depression and suicidal ideation among rural Bangladeshi women: a community-based study. Archives of women’s mental health. 2009;12(5):351–8. doi: 10.1007/s00737-009-0080-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Gavin AR, Tabb KM, Melville JL, Guo Y, Katon W. Prevalence and correlates of suicidal ideation during pregnancy. Archives of women’s mental health. 2011;14(3):239–46. doi: 10.1007/s00737-011-0207-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Organisation WH. Global health Observatory (GHO) data. 2015.
  • 45.Gold KJ, Singh V, Marcus SM, Palladino CL. Mental health, substance use and intimate partner problems among pregnant and postpartum suicide victims in the National Violent Death Reporting System. General hospital psychiatry. 2012;34(2):139–45. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2011.09.017 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Van den Bergh BR, Mulder EJ, Mennes M, Glover V. Antenatal maternal anxiety and stress and the neurobehavioural development of the fetus and child: links and possible mechanisms. A review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews. 2005;29(2):237–58. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2004.10.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Brand SR, Brennan PA. Impact of antenatal and postpartum maternal mental illness: how are the children? Clinical obstetrics and gynecology. 2009;52(3):441–55. doi: 10.1097/GRF.0b013e3181b52930 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Butler SA, Khanlian SA, Cole LA. Detection of early pregnancy forms of human chorionic gonadotropin by home pregnancy test devices. Clinical chemistry. 2001;47(12):2131–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Sabarguna BS, Sakinah F, Reyhan M. Normal Pregnancy Diagnosis Using Software of Ultrasonography Decision Support System. Obstetrics: IntechOpen; 2017. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Verberg M, Gillott D, Al-Fardan N, Grudzinskas J. Hyperemesis gravidarum, a literature review. Human reproduction update. 2005;11(5):527–39. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmi021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Kessler RC, Üstün TB. The world mental health (WMH) survey initiative version of the world health organization (WHO) composite international diagnostic interview (CIDI). International journal of methods in psychiatric research. 2004;13(2):93–121. doi: 10.1002/mpr.168 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Buysse DJ, Germain A, Moul DE, Franzen PL, Brar LK, Fletcher ME, et al. Efficacy of brief behavioral treatment for chronic insomnia in older adults. Archives of internal medicine. 2011;171(10):887–95. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.535 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Lee E-H, Moon SH, Cho MS, Park ES, Kim SY, Han JS, et al. The 21-item and 12-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales: Psychometric evaluation in a Korean population. Asian nursing research. 2019;13(1):30–7. doi: 10.1016/j.anr.2018.11.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.McFarlane J, Parker B, Soeken K, Bullock L. Assessing for abuse during pregnancy: severity and frequency of injuries and associated entry into prenatal care. Jama. 1992;267(23):3176–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Kocalevent R-D, Berg L, Beutel ME, Hinz A, Zenger M, Härter M, et al. Social support in the general population: standardization of the Oslo social support scale (OSSS-3). BMC Psychology. 2018;6(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s40359-018-0249-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Newcombe DA, Humeniuk RE, Ali R. Validation of the world health organization alcohol, smoking and substance involvement screening test (ASSIST): report of results from the Australian site. Drug and alcohol review. 2005;24(3):217–26. doi: 10.1080/09595230500170266 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Tonsing KN. Psychometric properties and validation of Nepali version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21). Asian Journal of Psychiatry. 2014;8:63–6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2013.11.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Sinclair SJ, Siefert CJ, Slavin-Mulford JM, Stein MB, Renna M, Blais MA. Psychometric evaluation and normative data for the depression, anxiety, and stress scales-21 (DASS-21) in a nonclinical sample of US adults. Evaluation & the health professions. 2012;35(3):259–79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Oei TP, Sawang S, Goh YW, Mukhtar F. Using the depression anxiety stress scale 21 (DASS-21) across cultures. International Journal of Psychology. 2013;48(6):1018–29. doi: 10.1080/00207594.2012.755535 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Carter G, Yu Z, Bryan MA, Brown JL, Winhusen T, Cochran G. Validation of the tobacco, alcohol, prescription medication, and other substance use (TAPS) tool with the who alcohol, smoking, and substance involvement screening test (assist). Addictive behaviors. 2022;126:107178. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.107178 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Molla A, Mengesha A, Derajew H, Kerebih H. Suicidal ideation, attempt, and associated factors among patients with tuberculosis in Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. Psychiatry journal. 2019;2019. doi: 10.1155/2019/4149806 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Haile K, Awoke T, Ayano G, Tareke M, Abate A, Nega M. Suicide ideation and attempts among people with epilepsy in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Annals of general psychiatry. 2018;17(1):1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Gebremariam EH, Reta MM, Nasir Z, Amdie FZ. Prevalence and associated factors of suicidal ideation and attempt among people living with HIV/AIDS at Zewditu Memorial Hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. Psychiatry journal. 2017;2017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Bitew H, Andargie G, Tadesse A, Belete A, Fekadu W, Mekonen T. Suicidal ideation, attempt, and determining factors among HIV/AIDS patients, Ethiopia. Depression research and treatment. 2016;2016. doi: 10.1155/2016/8913160 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Rashid E, Kebede D, Alem A. Evaluation of an Amharic version of the composite international diagnostic interview (CIDI) in Ethiopia. Ethiopian journal of health development. 1996;10(2). [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Al Maqbali M, Hughes C, Gracey J, Rankin J, Dunwoody L, Hacker E. Validation of the Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) with Arabic cancer patients. Sleep and Biological Rhythms. 2020;18:217–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Zhong Q-Y, Gelaye B, Sánchez SE, Williams MA. Psychometric properties of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) in a cohort of Peruvian pregnant women. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine. 2015;11(8):869–77. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.4936 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Liu D, Kahathuduwa C, Vazsonyi AT. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI): Psychometric and clinical risk score applications among college students. Psychological Assessment. 2021;33(9):816. doi: 10.1037/pas0001027 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Molla A, Nigussie J, Girma B. Prevalence and associated factors of suicidal behavior among pregnant mothers in southern Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study. BMC public health. 2022;22(1):1–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Asad N, Karmaliani R, Sullaiman N, Bann CM, McClure EM, Pasha O, et al. Prevalence of suicidal thoughts and attempts among pregnant Pakistani women. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica. 2010;89(12):1545–51. doi: 10.3109/00016349.2010.526185 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Zhong Q-Y, Gelaye B, Rondon MB, Sánchez SE, Simon GE, Henderson DC, et al. Using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) to assess suicidal ideation among pregnant women in Lima, Peru. Archives of women’s mental health. 2015;18(6):783–92. doi: 10.1007/s00737-014-0481-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Supraja T, Thennarasu K, Satyanarayana VA, Seena T, Desai G, Jangam KV, et al. Suicidality in early pregnancy among antepartum mothers in urban India. Archives of women’s mental health. 2016;19(6):1101–8. doi: 10.1007/s00737-016-0660-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Huang H, Faisal-Cury A, Chan Y-F, Tabb K, Katon W, Menezes PR. Suicidal ideation during pregnancy: prevalence and associated factors among low-income women in São Paulo, Brazil. Archives of women’s mental health. 2012;15(2):135–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Tabb KM, Gavin AR, Faisal-Cury A, Nidey N, Chan Y-F, Malinga T, et al. Prevalence of antenatal suicidal ideation among racially and ethnically diverse WIC enrolled women receiving care in a Midwestern public health clinic. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2019;256:278–81. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2019.06.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Castro e Couto T, Brancaglion MYM, Cardoso MN, Faria GC, Garcia FD, Nicolato R, et al. Suicidality among pregnant women in Brazil: prevalence and risk factors. Archives of women’s mental health. 2016;19(2):343–8. doi: 10.1007/s00737-015-0552-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Abdelghani M, Saad A, Khalil Y, Ibrahem M, Badr M, Saraya Y, et al. Can lifetime exposure to intimate partner violence predict suicidality in a sample of Egyptian pregnant women: a cross-sectional study? The European Journal of Psychiatry. 2021;35(2):83–91. [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Gelaye B, Barrios YV, Zhong Q-Y, Rondon MB, Borba CP, Sánchez SE, et al. Association of poor subjective sleep quality with suicidal ideation among pregnant Peruvian women. General hospital psychiatry. 2015;37(5):441–7. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2015.04.014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.El-Skaan RGA, Abdelrahman RM, Hassan AMA. Retrospective Analysis of Hyperemesis Gravidarum and Its Psychological Impact during Hospital Admission. The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India. 2023;73(Suppl 1):19–24. doi: 10.1007/s13224-023-01787-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Bray N, Grasby KL, Lind PA, Painter JN, Colodro-Conde L, Medland SE. The psychosocial impact of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy as a predictor of postpartum depression. Journal of health psychology. 2021;26(7):1061–72. doi: 10.1177/1359105319859048 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Kjeldgaard HK, Eberhard-Gran M, Benth JŠ, Vikanes ÅV. Hyperemesis gravidarum and the risk of emotional distress during and after pregnancy. Archives of women’s mental health. 2017;20(6):747–56. doi: 10.1007/s00737-017-0770-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Polo‐Kantola P, Aukia L, Karlsson H, Karlsson L, Paavonen EJ. Sleep quality during pregnancy: associations with depressive and anxiety symptoms. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica. 2017;96(2):198–206. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13056 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Farias DR, Pinto TdJP, Teofilo MMA, Vilela AAF, dos Santos Vaz J, Nardi AE, et al. Prevalence of psychiatric disorders in the first trimester of pregnancy and factors associated with current suicide risk. Psychiatry research. 2013;210(3):962–8. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2013.08.053 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Rennison CM, Welchans S. Intimate partner violence: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice; …; 2000. [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Breiding M, Basile KC, Smith SG, Black MC, Mahendra RR. Intimate partner violence surveillance: Uniform definitions and recommended data elements. Version 2.0. 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Crawford B, Kasmidi M, Korompis F, Pollnac RB. Factors influencing progress in establishing community-based marine protected areas in Indonesia. Coastal Management. 2006;34(1):39–64. [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Chalachew Kassaw Demoze

2 Jan 2024

PONE-D-23-31139Suicidal ideation and associated factor among pregnant women in Eastern part of Ethiopia.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Gebremariam,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 16 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Chalachew Kassaw Demoze, Msc

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Funding Section of your manuscript:

“The whole required (material and humanitarian) cost for this research work was covered by Haramaya University.”

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. In the online submission form, you indicated that [The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.].

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 1. In a public repository, 2. Within the manuscript itself, or 3. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval.

4. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear editor , I would like to thank you for writing a good paper.

But I do have some concerns and corrections

1. Have you done any labratory experiments? for a statement, " those mothers with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to other medical conditions such as thyroid

diseases and liver diseases were excluded from the study after proven investigation." If so, please state the data collection tool.

2. Please rewrite a reliability description (specificity, sensitivity) for each tool you have used to assess the outcome and associated factors.(World Health Organization (WHO) composite international diagnostic

interview (CIDI) assessment tool, Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST), Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale - 21 (DASS-21) , Abuse Assessment Scale (AAS) and Oslo Social support Scale.

3. It is better to describe some of the clinical variables ( Hypermesisgravidrum and gestational age information) that were taken from their medical card or chart)

4. it is better to correct spelling errors ( at the regression table; medical was written as medical) and number alignment ( center , right and left , look at the regression table)

5. Have you made statistical assumptions? If so, please describe: symptoms of suicidal ideation is also found in depressive symptoms of DASS.) Do you solve this collinearity? , state in detail on data analysis

6. On your exclusion criteria, you did not mention any exclusion of those who have a previous history of mental illness. This might affect your outcome variable if you include how do you treat your data ( there are 3 in your data )

7. It is better to rewrite the title of the place of study. I mean, it misled a reader as it was conducted in all public hospitals found in eastern Ethiopia.

8. In the discussion , it is better to explain a difference other than data collection tool difference.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: Dear authors,

Thank you for your contribution to the field. I have had the opportunity to review your manuscript and found it well-written. However, there are some points you need to address to improve the quality of your work, and I have mentioned them section by section as follows:

Title and Abstract

1. The title is interesting and it addresses the current public health problem, but you should rewrite it as “Suicidal ideation and its associated factor among pregnant women in the eastern part of Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study.”

2. In the methods section of the abstract, you should incorporate the specific study area and study period.

3.In the result section of the abstract, paraphrase the following sentence to make it easier for the reader: Experiencing intimate partner violence and stress (AOR= 3.46; at 95% CI= = 1.75–6.66) and (AOR = 2.88; at 95% CI = 1.11–7.36) were significantly associated with suicidal ideation among pregnant women. “

4. Put keywords in ascending order

introduction  

5. Overall, the introduction is well-written and adheres to the systematic writing of the background (deductive approach), and it maintains coherence between paragraphs. However, try to improve the grammatical errors through proofreading.

Methods  

The methods are clear, and the statistical approaches used in this study are appropriate. I have only three suggestions to improve the paper:

6. The sample size calculation formula does not need to be included in the calculation. The author just needs to convey what formula is used along with the margin of error set to get the required sample size.

7. In lines 102-107, you should specify your study area. In which hospital did you conduct your study? Let us know more about your study hospitals.

8. In lines 120–122, why do you exclude those with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to other medical conditions such as thyroid diseases and liver diseases after proven investigation? It needs further justification if thyroid diseases and liver diseases have a direct linkage with suicidal ideation; if it is so, don’t forget to cite your reference for your justification.

9. In line 127, why do you use a margin of error of 0.03 instead of 0.05?

10.Line 135-140 Why do you take average monthly attendants since your study period is 2 months? You calculated the k value in the wrong way. Please readjust it.

11. In Line 141, why do you select from the first three since your k value is 2?

12. In lines 143–146,  you should provide the questionnaire that was used for your study in a supplementary file and cite it in the method section as a supplemental file.

13. In Line 166 (IPV), you should provide both full words and abbreviations when you use it for the first time.

14. In lines 168–169, move the sentence and merge it under data quality control.

15. In data quality control, did you provide training for data collectors? If so, you should state it in your manuscript.

16. In Line 170-189, move your operational definitions above the data collection instruments and procedures.

17. Cite reference for the operational definitions of pregnant women, hyperemesis gravidarum, Suicidal ideation and sleep quality

Results

The results are relevant, but you should revise them based on the following comment to improve the manuscript.

18.Line 214, “{26.53” should be replaced by "26.53 years.”

19. Line 215, do you think the word most is suitable for 58.36%?

20. Line 217, delete “with the largest proportion."

21. In Table 1, you should re-categorize the age by using the standard age category. If you have a study participant whose age is less than 18, you should specify it by adding the category <18 years, since it will provide us with good results.

22. It is difficult to assess the average monthly income for your study participants since either they are not civil servants or unless you did a wealth index.

23. Please try to change Table 4 into a pie chart format

24. Lines 260–262, rewrite each factor separately: “ The odds ratio of having suicidal ideation for a pregnant mother with depressive and anxiety symptoms were 2.79 and 3.37 compared to their counterparts (AOR = 2.79; (95% CI= = 1.49–5.23) and AOR = 3.37; (95% CI = 1.69–6.68), respectively.”

25. In Table 5, age less than 20, how do you run the regression for cell value less than 5, which is "3"? It is a critical issue and must be addressed by re-categorizing the age value.

26. In the Table 5 suicidal ideation column, put the suicidal value of yes before no for a better understanding

Discussion  

The discussions are explained well enough and based on the results. But to improve it, you should revise it based on the following comments:

27. In Line 282, try to justify how the tool difference is the possible reason for the variation. Try to justify by raising ideas about each tool and their possibility to increase or decrease their estimation of prevalence.  Please try to think beyond tool difference and inclusion criteria

28. Lines 290–292, try to justify how the tool difference is the possible reason for the variation. Try to justify by raising ideas about each tool and their possibility to increase or decrease their estimation of prevalence. Please try to think beyond tool difference and inclusion criteria

29. Line 301, you should specify by stating the specific study area for “This is supported by studies (13–15).”

30. Line 301-303 is not directly linked to your justification. You should better delete it. “A cross-sectional study conducted in the United Kingdom reported that 52.1 percent of participants thought to terminate their pregnancy, and 4.9 percent of them terminated their pregnancy owing to hyperemesis gravidarum.”

Strengths and Limitations of the study

31. Line 344, please clarify this sentence:evidence-based laboratory tests Which lab? To assess what?

32. In lines 344–345, it is good to state recall bias and social desirability bias as limitations, but you should better state your effort to reduce those biases in this section.

33.Line 344–346 is a non-sense paragraph; you are expected to paraphrase it “However, recall bias, social desirability, a cross-sectional study design that cannot allow establishing a temporal relationship between suicidal ideation, and significant associated factors were the limitations of the study.

Conclusion

34. Your conclusion is aligned with the implication of your study rather than the mere figure of the results and is also drawn from your main finding. I am okay with that.

35. In the recommendation section, why do you only stick with hyperemesis gravidarum since you have many findings?

Reviewer #2: 1.It will be more helpful to the readers if the setting where the study was conducted is mentioned in the abstract part.

2.It also makes the research more influential if the research owner gives full feedback on the findings. For example, unwanted pregnancy is a factor for SI, but there is nothing to what should be done

3.It would not be good to use one or two of the references that are out of date

4.The Overview of suicidal ideation among the study population is not organized well based on Global to local contexts .

5.author text document spacing should be double spacing according to the journal guide line

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Eyob Ketema Bogale

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2024 Mar 28;19(3):e0300417. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300417.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


13 Feb 2024

REBUTTAL LETTER

We were pleased to have an opportunity to revise our manuscript entitled “Suicidal ideation and associated factor among pregnant women in Eastern part of Ethiopia”. In the revised manuscript, we have carefully considered journal requirements, the editor's and reviewers suggestions and comments and we have tried to address it accordingly. The editor’s and reviewer’s comments were very helpful overall, and we are appreciative of such constructive feedback on our original submission. After addressing the issues raised, we feel the quality of the paper is much improved.

Sincerely,

On behalf of all authors,

Tilahun Bete

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

Author’s response: We have checked the templates and made the adjustments to meet the journal requirements. Some of them are:

We corrected all major sections (Abstract, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion) to level 1 heading, bold type, 18pt font, and sentence case

We corrected sub-sections of major sections to Level 2 heading, bold type, 16pt font, and sentence case.

We corrected sub-sections of within level 2 headings to level 3 heading, bold type, 14pt font, and sentence case.

We used appropriate file naming.

We hope that it now fits the style requirements. Thank you

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Funding Section of your manuscript:

“The whole required (material and humanitarian) cost for this research work was covered by Haramaya University.”

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we removed any funding-related text from the acknowledgments section or other areas of the manuscript in the revised version. We do not want to change the funding statement stated on the online submission form since it is similar with what we have stated in the funding section. Thank you.

3. In the online submission form, you indicated that [The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.]

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 1. In a public repository, 2. Within the manuscript itself, or 3. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we have uploaded all the data underlying the findings described in the manuscript as supplementary information. Then, we have changed the statement in Availability of data and materials section as “All relevant data are within the paper and it’s supporting information files” in the revised version of the manuscript. Thank you.

4. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we moved it to the Methods section and deleted it from any other section. Thank you.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear Author, I would like to thank you for writing a good paper.

But I do have some concerns and corrections

1. Have you done any labratory experiments? for a statement, " those mothers with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to other medical conditions such as thyroid

diseases and liver diseases were excluded from the study after proven investigation." If so, please state the data collection tool.

Authors’ response: Dear editor, thank you for your concern. In order to decrease the potential confounders, we did the lab investigations for those participants suspected for underlying medical conditions like thyroid disease (sent for T3, T4, and TSH) and liver disease (sent for liver function test like SGOT, SGPT). We included this in the data collection tool section in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

2. Please rewrite a reliability description (specificity, sensitivity) for each tool you have used to assess the outcome and associated factors.(World Health Organization (WHO) composite international diagnostic

interview (CIDI) assessment tool, Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST), Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale - 21 (DASS-21) , Abuse Assessment Scale (AAS) and Oslo Social support Scale.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we have tried to rewrite a reliability description (specificity, sensitivity) for each tools used in this study in the revised version of the manuscript. Thank you.

3. It is better to describe some of the clinical variables ( Hypermesis gravidrum and gestational age information) that were taken from their medical card or chart)

Authors’ response: Dear editor, thank you for the comment. We addressed the comment and described the variables that were taken from the medical charts at the end of data collection instruments section in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

4. it is better to correct spelling errors ( at the regression table; medical was written as medical) and number alignment ( center , right and left , look at the regression table)

Authors’ response: Dear editor, we have accepted the comment and corrected the spelling errors and number alignment. Thank you.

5. Have you made statistical assumptions? If so, please describe: symptoms of suicidal ideation is also found in depressive symptoms of DASS.) Do you solve this collinearity? , state in detail on data analysis

Authors’ response: Dear editor, thank you for the comment. We did the multi-collinearity and extreme outlier assumption checking by calculating Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) and residual respectively, including for suicidal component in the DASS with suicidal ideation. We have described and included this in the revised version of the manuscript. However, we didn’t check linearity assumption since no continuous independent variable was used in the data. Thank you.

6. On your exclusion criteria, you did not mention any exclusion of those who have a previous history of mental illness. This might affect your outcome variable if you include how do you treat your data ( there are 3 in your data )

Authors’ response: We have included those participants who have a previous of mental illness because they had minor mental health problem which is less likely to experience suicidal behavior and consequently less likely to impact the outcome variable. Therefore, we included them in order to avoid deliberate exclusion of the participants. Thank you.

7. It is better to rewrite the title of the place of study. I mean, it misled a reader as it was conducted in all public hospitals found in eastern Ethiopia.

Authors’ response: Dear editor, we have accepted the comment and rewrite the title as “Suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals of Harari regional state, eastern Ethiopia” as suggested. Thank you

8. In the discussion , it is better to explain a difference other than data collection tool difference.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we tried to describe the possible explanations for the discrepancy occurred between the current study and previous studies other than tool difference in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1: Dear authors,

Thank you for your contribution to the field. I have had the opportunity to review your manuscript and found it well-written. However, there are some points you need to address to improve the quality of your work, and I have mentioned them section by section as follows:

Title and Abstract

1. The title is interesting and it addresses the current public health problem, but you should rewrite it as “Suicidal ideation and its associated factor among pregnant women in the eastern part of Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study.”

Authors’ response: Dear reviewer, we have accepted the comment and rewrite the title as “Suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals of Harari regional state, eastern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study” as suggested by you and editor. Thank you.

2. In the methods section of the abstract, you should incorporate the specific study area and study period.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we included a specific study area and study period. Thank you.

3.In the result section of the abstract, paraphrase the following sentence to make it easier for the reader: Experiencing intimate partner violence and stress (AOR= 3.46; at 95% CI= = 1.75–6.66) and (AOR = 2.88; at 95% CI = 1.11–7.36) were significantly associated with suicidal ideation among pregnant women. “

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and paraphrase it accordingly in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

4. Put keywords in ascending order

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we put the keywords in ascending order. Thank you.

introduction

5. Overall, the introduction is well-written and adheres to the systematic writing of the background (deductive approach), and it maintains coherence between paragraphs. However, try to improve the grammatical errors through proofreading.

Authors’ response: Dear reviewer, thank you for the comment. We have tried to improve the grammatical error in the revised version of the manuscript.

Methods

The methods are clear, and the statistical approaches used in this study are appropriate. I have only three suggestions to improve the paper:

6. The sample size calculation formula does not need to be included in the calculation. The author just needs to convey what formula is used along with the margin of error set to get the required sample size.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and removed the formula as suggested. Thank you.

7. In lines 102-107, you should specify your study area. In which hospital did you conduct your study? Let us know more about your study hospitals.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and specified the study area including the two public hospitals where the study was done. Thank you.

8. In lines 120–122, why do you exclude those with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to other medical conditions such as thyroid diseases and liver diseases after proven investigation? It needs further justification if thyroid diseases and liver diseases have a direct linkage with suicidal ideation; if it is so, don’t forget to cite your reference for your justification.

Authors’ response: Thank you for the concern. One of the primary reasons for excluding individuals with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to other medical conditions from the study was the complexity and heterogeneity of their medical condition. Thyroid diseases and liver diseases encompass a wide range of disorders, each with its own unique pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and treatment approaches. Including individuals with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to these diverse conditions in a study may introduce significant variability that could confound the results and make it challenging to draw meaningful conclusions. That is why we prefer to exclude them. Thank you.

9. In line 127, why do you use a margin of error of 0.03 instead of 0.05?

Authors’ response: We took proportion (P) of 13.3% from the previous study conducted in Jimma as a magnitude of suicidal ideation among pregnant women, which was resulting small sample size. Therefore, in order to increase the sample size, the margin error of 3% was taken. Thank you.

10.Line 135-140 Why do you take average monthly attendants since your study period is 2 months? You calculated the k value in the wrong way. Please readjust it.

Authors’ response: In order to get the average flow of attendants, we dividing the annual total number into months. However, we made an error on the calculating the K value, we supposed to take the two month period, and we readjusted it in the revised manuscript as “The interval size (k) is calculated using the following formula. k=N/n =2448/543 = 4.5 ≈4.So every four persons was selected from each hospital”. Thank you for your constructive comment.

11. In Line 141, why do you select from the first three since your k value is 2?

Authors’ response: We took the comment and corrected it in the revised version of the manuscript as “The first pregnant woman was selected from the first four by lottery method”. Thank you.

12. In lines 143–146, you should provide the questionnaire that was used for your study in a supplementary file and cite it in the method section as a supplemental file.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we have uploaded all the data underlying the findings described in the manuscript as supplementary information and we have cited it as supplemental file in data collection tool sub-section in the methods section of the revised the manuscript. Thank you.

13. In Line 166 (IPV), you should provide both full words and abbreviations when you use it for the first time.

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment. Thank you.

14. In lines 168–169, move the sentence and merge it under data quality control.

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment. Thank you.

15. In data quality control, did you provide training for data collectors? If so, you should state it in your manuscript.

Authors’ response: Yes we provide the training for data collectors regarding data collection methods, data collection tools, and how to handle ethical issues. We have stated this in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

16. In Line 170-189, move your operational definitions above the data collection instruments and procedures.

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment. Thank you.

17. Cite reference for the operational definitions of pregnant women, hyperemesis gravidarum, Suicidal ideation and sleep quality

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment. Thank you.

Results

The results are relevant, but you should revise them based on the following comment to improve the manuscript.

18.Line 214, “{26.53” should be replaced by "26.53 years.”

19. Line 215, do you think the word most is suitable for 58.36%?

20. Line 217, delete “with the largest proportion."

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comments from 18 to 20. Thank you.

21. In Table 1, you should re-categorize the age by using the standard age category. If you have a study participant whose age is less than 18, you should specify it by adding the category <18 years, since it will provide us with good results.

Authors’ response: Thank you for your concern. We have got only two participants who aged than 18 years and this small number makes us unable to compare them with other age category. That is why we have merged it as less than 20 years.

22. It is difficult to assess the average monthly income for your study participants since either they are not civil servants or unless you did a wealth index.

Authors’ response: We agree with your concern. Since we didn’t do the wealth index and less reliable to put it in income, we omit it from the revised manuscript. Thank you.

23. Please try to change Table 4 into a pie chart format

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and changed table 4 into pie chart. Thank you.

24. Lines 260–262, rewrite each factor separately: “ The odds ratio of having suicidal ideation for a pregnant mother with depressive and anxiety symptoms were 2.79 and 3.37 compared to their counterparts (AOR = 2.79; (95% CI= = 1.49–5.23) and AOR = 3.37; (95% CI = 1.69–6.68), respectively.”

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we rewrite it as suggested. Thank you.

25. In Table 5, age less than 20, how do you run the regression for cell value less than 5, which is "3"? It is a critical issue and must be addressed by re-categorizing the age value.

Authors’ response: Thank you for your concern. The regression can run the cell value if it is not 0, but the total frequency of the specific category should be more than 5, which is 27 in this case. That is why we categorize it as mentioned in the manuscript. Thank you.

26. In the Table 5 suicidal ideation column, put the suicidal value of yes before no for a better understanding

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment as suggested. Thank you.

Discussion

The discussions are explained well enough and based on the results. But to improve it, you should revise it based on the following comments:

27. In Line 282, try to justify how the tool difference is the possible reason for the variation. Try to justify by raising ideas about each tool and their possibility to increase or decrease their estimation of prevalence. Please try to think beyond tool difference and inclusion criteria

28. Lines 290–292, try to justify how the tool difference is the possible reason for the variation. Try to justify by raising ideas about each tool and their possibility to increase or decrease their estimation of prevalence. Please try to think beyond tool difference and inclusion criteria

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and tried to describe the possible explanations for the discrepancy occurred between the current study and previous studies other than tool difference in the revised manuscript. Additionally, we also elaborated how the tools difference affects the outcome (suicide). Thank you.

29. Line 301, you should specify by stating the specific study area for “This is supported by studies (13–15).”

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment as suggested. Thank you.

30. Line 301-303 is not directly linked to your justification. You should better delete it. “A cross-sectional study conducted in the United Kingdom reported that 52.1 percent of participants thought to terminate their pregnancy, and 4.9 percent of them terminated their pregnancy owing to hyperemesis gravidarum.”

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and deleted the stated statement since it is not a relevant justification. Thank you.

Strengths and Limitations of the study

31. Line 344, please clarify this sentence:evidence-based laboratory tests Which lab? To assess what?

32. In lines 344–345, it is good to state recall bias and social desirability bias as limitations, but you should better state your effort to reduce those biases in this section.

33.Line 344–346 is a non-sense paragraph; you are expected to paraphrase it “However, recall bias, social desirability, a cross-sectional study design that cannot allow establishing a temporal relationship between suicidal ideation, and significant associated factors were the limitations of the study.

Authors’ response: For question 31 to 33, we have accepted the comments and we extensively rewrite the strength and limitations section in the revised version of the manuscript.

Conclusion

34. Your conclusion is aligned with the implication of your study rather than the mere figure of the results and is also drawn from your main finding. I am okay with that.

35. In the recommendation section, why do you only stick with hyperemesis gravidarum since you have many findings?

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we added the recommendations for the remaining main findings. Thank you.

Reviewer #2: 1.It will be more helpful to the readers if the setting where the study was conducted is mentioned in the abstract part.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we included a specific setting were the study was conducted in the revised version of the manuscript. Thank you.

2.It also makes the research more influential if the research owner gives full feedback on the findings. For example, unwanted pregnancy is a factor for SI, but there is nothing to what should be done

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we added the recommendations for the all main findings as suggested. Thank you.

3.It would not be good to use one or two of the references that are out of date

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we have tried to use latest references. Thank you.

4. The Overview of suicidal ideation among the study population is not organized well based on Global to local contexts. .

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and re-arranged the introduction part as suggested. Thank you.

5.author text document spacing should be double spacing according to the journal guide line

Authors’ response: We have checked the journal guideline and made the adjustments to meet the journal requirements. Thank you.

________________________________________

________________________________________

Attachment

Submitted filename: Rebuttal letter.docx

pone.0300417.s003.docx (26.8KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Chalachew Kassaw Demoze

15 Feb 2024

PONE-D-23-31139R1Suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals of Harari regional state, Eastern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional studyPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Gebremariam,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Mar 31 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Chalachew Kassaw Demoze, Msc

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Additional Editor Comments:

PLOS one Reviewer comment (Suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals of Harari regional state, Eastern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study).

1. On the introduction section

1.1. it is better to change the second reference 1 ( you cited two times )

2. Discussion

2.1. It is better to revise line number 315-325 , it is better to cite for each measurement of suicidal ideation e.g. EPDS ( cite here a study ) , (SBQ-R) ( cite here), ……..

2.2. It is better to revise line number 330-341, it is better to add citation previous studies ( cite here) , Ethiopia (cite here , in study) and studies done in other countries ( cite here).

2.3. It is better to revise line number 375-378 , It is not advisable to compare with USA studies , please find studies done in low income countries , Asian …..

Finally it is better to revise spelling, grammar and vocabulary corrections on the whole section of a manuscript.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2024 Mar 28;19(3):e0300417. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300417.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


22 Feb 2024

REBUTTAL LETTER

We were pleased to have an opportunity to revise our manuscript entitled “Suicidal ideation and associated factor among pregnant women in Eastern part of Ethiopia”. In the revised manuscript, we have carefully considered journal requirements, the editor's and reviewers suggestions and comments and we have tried to address them accordingly. The editor’s and reviewer’s comments were very helpful overall, and we are appreciative of such constructive feedback on our original submission. After addressing the issues raised, we feel the quality of the paper is much improved. The second comment of the editor is responded to at the end of the first comment of the editor.

Sincerely,

On behalf of all authors,

Tilahun Bete

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

Author’s response: We have checked the templates and made the adjustments to meet the journal requirements. Some of them are:

We corrected all major sections (Abstract, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion) to level 1 heading, bold type, 18pt font, and sentence case

We corrected sub-sections of major sections to Level 2 heading, bold type, 16pt font, and sentence case.

We corrected sub-sections of within level 2 headings to level 3 heading, bold type, 14pt font, and sentence case.

We used appropriate file naming.

We hope that it now fits the style requirements. Thank you

2. Thank you for stating the following in the Funding Section of your manuscript:

“The whole required (material and humanitarian) cost for this research work was covered by Haramaya University.”

We note that you have provided funding information that is not currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

“The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we removed any funding-related text from the acknowledgments section or other areas of the manuscript in the revised version. We do not want to change the funding statement stated on the online submission form since it is similar with what we have stated in the funding section. Thank you.

3. In the online submission form, you indicated that [The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.]

All PLOS journals now require all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript to be freely available to other researchers, either 1. In a public repository, 2. Within the manuscript itself, or 3. Uploaded as supplementary information.

This policy applies to all data except where public deposition would breach compliance with the protocol approved by your research ethics board. If your data cannot be made publicly available for ethical or legal reasons (e.g., public availability would compromise patient privacy), please explain your reasons on resubmission and your exemption request will be escalated for approval.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we have uploaded all the data underlying the findings described in the manuscript as supplementary information. Then, we have changed the statement in Availability of data and materials section as “All relevant data are within the paper and it’s supporting information files” in the revised version of the manuscript. Thank you.

4. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we moved it to the Methods section and deleted it from any other section. Thank you.

Additional Editor Comments:

Dear editor , I would like to thank you for writing a good paper.

But I do have some concerns and corrections

1. Have you done any laboratory experiments? for a statement, " those mothers with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to other medical conditions such as thyroid

diseases and liver diseases were excluded from the study after proven investigation." If so, please state the data collection tool.

Authors’ response: Dear editor, thank you for your concern. In order to decrease the potential confounders, we did the lab investigations for those participants suspected for underlying medical conditions like thyroid disease (sent for T3, T4, and TSH) and liver disease (sent for liver function test like SGOT, SGPT). We included this in the data collection tool section in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

2. Please rewrite a reliability description (specificity, sensitivity) for each tool you have used to assess the outcome and associated factors.(World Health Organization (WHO) composite international diagnostic

interview (CIDI) assessment tool, Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST), Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale - 21 (DASS-21) , Abuse Assessment Scale (AAS) and Oslo Social support Scale.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we have tried to rewrite a reliability description (specificity, sensitivity) for each tools used in this study in the revised version of the manuscript. Thank you.

3. It is better to describe some of the clinical variables ( Hypermesis gravidrum and gestational age information) that were taken from their medical card or chart)

Authors’ response: Dear editor, thank you for the comment. We addressed the comment and described the variables that were taken from the medical charts at the end of data collection instruments section in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

4. it is better to correct spelling errors ( at the regression table; medical was written as medical) and number alignment ( center , right and left , look at the regression table)

Authors’ response: Dear editor, we have accepted the comment and corrected the spelling errors and number alignment. Thank you.

5. Have you made statistical assumptions? If so, please describe: symptoms of suicidal ideation is also found in depressive symptoms of DASS.) Do you solve this collinearity? , state in detail on data analysis

Authors’ response: Dear editor, thank you for the comment. We did the multi-collinearity and extreme outlier assumption checking by calculating Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) and residual respectively, including for suicidal component in the DASS with suicidal ideation. We have described and included this in the revised version of the manuscript. However, we didn’t check linearity assumption since no continuous independent variable was used in the data. Thank you.

6. On your exclusion criteria, you did not mention any exclusion of those who have a previous history of mental illness. This might affect your outcome variable if you include how do you treat your data ( there are 3 in your data )

Authors’ response: We have included those participants who have a previous of mental illness because they had minor mental health problem which is less likely to experience suicidal behavior and consequently less likely to impact the outcome variable. Therefore, we included them in order to avoid deliberate exclusion of the participants. Thank you.

7. It is better to rewrite the title of the place of study. I mean, it misled a reader as it was conducted in all public hospitals found in eastern Ethiopia.

Authors’ response: Dear editor, we have accepted the comment and rewrite the title as “Suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals of Harari regional state, eastern Ethiopia” as suggested. Thank you

8. In the discussion , it is better to explain a difference other than data collection tool difference.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we tried to describe the possible explanations for the discrepancy occurred between the current study and previous studies other than tool difference in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

On the introduction section

1.1. it is better to change the second reference 1 ( you cited two times )

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we changed it accordingly.

2. Discussion

2.1. It is better to revise line number 315-325 , it is better to cite for each measurement of suicidal ideation e.g. EPDS ( cite here a study ) , (SBQ-R) ( cite here), ……..

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we cited the reference for each tool separately. You can see the revise manuscript.

2.2. It is better to revise line number 330-341, it is better to add citation previous studies ( cite here) , Ethiopia (cite here , in study) and studies done in other countries ( cite here).

We have accepted the comment and we cited accordingly. You can see the revise manuscript.

2.3. It is better to revise line number 375-378 , It is not advisable to compare with USA studies , please find studies done in low income countries , Asian …..

We have accepted the comment and we modified it.

Finally it is better to revise spelling, grammar and vocabulary corrections on the whole section of a manuscript.

We have tried to fix the grammar and spelling error in the revised manuscript.

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer #1: Dear authors,

Thank you for your contribution to the field. I have had the opportunity to review your manuscript and found it well-written. However, there are some points you need to address to improve the quality of your work, and I have mentioned them section by section as follows:

Title and Abstract

1. The title is interesting and it addresses the current public health problem, but you should rewrite it as “Suicidal ideation and its associated factor among pregnant women in the eastern part of Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study.”

Authors’ response: Dear reviewer, we have accepted the comment and rewrite the title as “Suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals of Harari regional state, eastern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study” as suggested by you and editor. Thank you.

2. In the methods section of the abstract, you should incorporate the specific study area and study period.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we included a specific study area and study period. Thank you.

3.In the result section of the abstract, paraphrase the following sentence to make it easier for the reader: Experiencing intimate partner violence and stress (AOR= 3.46; at 95% CI= = 1.75–6.66) and (AOR = 2.88; at 95% CI = 1.11–7.36) were significantly associated with suicidal ideation among pregnant women. “

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and paraphrase it accordingly in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

4. Put keywords in ascending order

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we put the keywords in ascending order. Thank you.

introduction

5. Overall, the introduction is well-written and adheres to the systematic writing of the background (deductive approach), and it maintains coherence between paragraphs. However, try to improve the grammatical errors through proofreading.

Authors’ response: Dear reviewer, thank you for the comment. We have tried to improve the grammatical error in the revised version of the manuscript.

Methods

The methods are clear, and the statistical approaches used in this study are appropriate. I have only three suggestions to improve the paper:

6. The sample size calculation formula does not need to be included in the calculation. The author just needs to convey what formula is used along with the margin of error set to get the required sample size.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and removed the formula as suggested. Thank you.

7. In lines 102-107, you should specify your study area. In which hospital did you conduct your study? Let us know more about your study hospitals.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and specified the study area including the two public hospitals where the study was done. Thank you.

8. In lines 120–122, why do you exclude those with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to other medical conditions such as thyroid diseases and liver diseases after proven investigation? It needs further justification if thyroid diseases and liver diseases have a direct linkage with suicidal ideation; if it is so, don’t forget to cite your reference for your justification.

Authors’ response: Thank you for the concern. One of the primary reasons for excluding individuals with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to other medical conditions from the study was the complexity and heterogeneity of their medical condition. Thyroid diseases and liver diseases encompass a wide range of disorders, each with its own unique pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and treatment approaches. Including individuals with hyperemesis gravidarum secondary to these diverse conditions in a study may introduce significant variability that could confound the results and make it challenging to draw meaningful conclusions. That is why we prefer to exclude them. Thank you.

9. In line 127, why do you use a margin of error of 0.03 instead of 0.05?

Authors’ response: We took proportion (P) of 13.3% from the previous study conducted in Jimma as a magnitude of suicidal ideation among pregnant women, which was resulting small sample size. Therefore, in order to increase the sample size, the margin error of 3% was taken. Thank you.

10.Line 135-140 Why do you take average monthly attendants since your study period is 2 months? You calculated the k value in the wrong way. Please readjust it.

Authors’ response: In order to get the average flow of attendants, we dividing the annual total number into months. However, we made an error on the calculating the K value, we supposed to take the two month period, and we readjusted it in the revised manuscript as “The interval size (k) is calculated using the following formula. k=N/n =2448/543 = 4.5 ≈4.So every four persons was selected from each hospital”. Thank you for your constructive comment.

11. In Line 141, why do you select from the first three since your k value is 2?

Authors’ response: We took the comment and corrected it in the revised version of the manuscript as “The first pregnant woman was selected from the first four by lottery method”. Thank you.

12. In lines 143–146, you should provide the questionnaire that was used for your study in a supplementary file and cite it in the method section as a supplemental file.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we have uploaded all the data underlying the findings described in the manuscript as supplementary information and we have cited it as supplemental file in data collection tool sub-section in the methods section of the revised the manuscript. Thank you.

13. In Line 166 (IPV), you should provide both full words and abbreviations when you use it for the first time.

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment. Thank you.

14. In lines 168–169, move the sentence and merge it under data quality control.

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment. Thank you.

15. In data quality control, did you provide training for data collectors? If so, you should state it in your manuscript.

Authors’ response: Yes we provide the training for data collectors regarding data collection methods, data collection tools, and how to handle ethical issues. We have stated this in the revised manuscript. Thank you.

16. In Line 170-189, move your operational definitions above the data collection instruments and procedures.

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment. Thank you.

17. Cite reference for the operational definitions of pregnant women, hyperemesis gravidarum, Suicidal ideation and sleep quality

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment. Thank you.

Results

The results are relevant, but you should revise them based on the following comment to improve the manuscript.

18.Line 214, “{26.53” should be replaced by "26.53 years.”

19. Line 215, do you think the word most is suitable for 58.36%?

20. Line 217, delete “with the largest proportion."

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comments from 18 to 20. Thank you.

21. In Table 1, you should re-categorize the age by using the standard age category. If you have a study participant whose age is less than 18, you should specify it by adding the category <18 years, since it will provide us with good results.

Authors’ response: Thank you for your concern. We have got only two participants who aged than 18 years and this small number makes us unable to compare them with other age category. That is why we have merged it as less than 20 years.

22. It is difficult to assess the average monthly income for your study participants since either they are not civil servants or unless you did a wealth index.

Authors’ response: We agree with your concern. Since we didn’t do the wealth index and less reliable to put it in income, we omit it from the revised manuscript. Thank you.

23. Please try to change Table 4 into a pie chart format

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and changed table 4 into pie chart. Thank you.

24. Lines 260–262, rewrite each factor separately: “ The odds ratio of having suicidal ideation for a pregnant mother with depressive and anxiety symptoms were 2.79 and 3.37 compared to their counterparts (AOR = 2.79; (95% CI= = 1.49–5.23) and AOR = 3.37; (95% CI = 1.69–6.68), respectively.”

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we rewrite it as suggested. Thank you.

25. In Table 5, age less than 20, how do you run the regression for cell value less than 5, which is "3"? It is a critical issue and must be addressed by re-categorizing the age value.

Authors’ response: Thank you for your concern. The regression can run the cell value if it is not 0, but the total frequency of the specific category should be more than 5, which is 27 in this case. That is why we categorize it as mentioned in the manuscript. Thank you.

26. In the Table 5 suicidal ideation column, put the suicidal value of yes before no for a better understanding

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment as suggested. Thank you.

Discussion

The discussions are explained well enough and based on the results. But to improve it, you should revise it based on the following comments:

27. In Line 282, try to justify how the tool difference is the possible reason for the variation. Try to justify by raising ideas about each tool and their possibility to increase or decrease their estimation of prevalence. Please try to think beyond tool difference and inclusion criteria

28. Lines 290–292, try to justify how the tool difference is the possible reason for the variation. Try to justify by raising ideas about each tool and their possibility to increase or decrease their estimation of prevalence. Please try to think beyond tool difference and inclusion criteria

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and tried to describe the possible explanations for the discrepancy occurred between the current study and previous studies other than tool difference in the revised manuscript. Additionally, we also elaborated how the tools difference affects the outcome (suicide). Thank you.

29. Line 301, you should specify by stating the specific study area for “This is supported by studies (13–15).”

Authors’ response: We have accepted and addressed the comment as suggested. Thank you.

30. Line 301-303 is not directly linked to your justification. You should better delete it. “A cross-sectional study conducted in the United Kingdom reported that 52.1 percent of participants thought to terminate their pregnancy, and 4.9 percent of them terminated their pregnancy owing to hyperemesis gravidarum.”

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and deleted the stated statement since it is not a relevant justification. Thank you.

Strengths and Limitations of the study

31. Line 344, please clarify this sentence:evidence-based laboratory tests Which lab? To assess what?

32. In lines 344–345, it is good to state recall bias and social desirability bias as limitations, but you should better state your effort to reduce those biases in this section.

33.Line 344–346 is a non-sense paragraph; you are expected to paraphrase it “However, recall bias, social desirability, a cross-sectional study design that cannot allow establishing a temporal relationship between suicidal ideation, and significant associated factors were the limitations of the study.

Authors’ response: For question 31 to 33, we have accepted the comments and we extensively rewrite the strength and limitations

section in the revised version of the manuscript.

Conclusion

34. Your conclusion is aligned with the implication of your study rather than the mere figure of the results and is also drawn from your main finding. I am okay with that.

35. In the recommendation section, why do you only stick with hyperemesis gravidarum since you have many findings?

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we added the recommendations for the remaining main findings. Thank you.

Reviewer #2: 1.It will be more helpful to the readers if the setting where the study was conducted is mentioned in the abstract part.

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we included a specific setting were the study was conducted in the revised version of the manuscript. Thank you.

2.It also makes the research more influential if the research owner gives full feedback on the findings. For example, unwanted pregnancy is a factor for SI, but there is nothing to what should be done

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we added the recommendations for the all main findings as suggested. Thank you.

3.It would not be good to use one or two of the references that are out of date

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and we have tried to use latest references. Thank you.

4. The Overview of suicidal ideation among the study population is not organized well based on Global to local contexts. .

Authors’ response: We have accepted the comment and re-arranged the introduction part as suggested. Thank you.

5.author text document spacing should be double spacing according to the journal guide line

Authors’ response: We have checked the journal guideline and made the adjustments to meet the journal requirements. Thank you.

________________________________________

________________________________________

Attachment

Submitted filename: Rebuttal letter.docx

pone.0300417.s004.docx (27.9KB, docx)

Decision Letter 2

Chalachew Kassaw Demoze

27 Feb 2024

Suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care at public hospitals of Harari regional state, Eastern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study

PONE-D-23-31139R2

Dear Dr. Gebremariam,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Chalachew Kassaw Demoze, Msc

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Dear author , please revise the following issues:

1. " Various studies have reported that hyperemesis gravidarum can be associated with suicide (14–16). Hyperemesis gravidarum is also one of the predisposing factors for depression, anxiety, and psychological problems, (14-16). "It is better to use a single reference for both .

2. it is better to re-write a discussion citation on both controversial issues "Brazil, 12.55% (72), is included both on inline and lower than the finding." , so it is better to revise it

3. It is better to revise again about the selection of studies done in the USA for discussion , almost you used 4 USA studies for discussion (references 16, 74, 83, 82). It is better to find studies done from comparable socio-economic status, such as in Asia, Latin America, and Africa.

4. It is better to revise grammar, spelling, and consistency throughout the whole body of the manuscript.

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Chalachew Kassaw Demoze

5 Mar 2024

PONE-D-23-31139R2

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Gebremariam,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Mr Chalachew Kassaw Demoze

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Dataset. The data set was used to determine suicidal ideation and associated factors among pregnant women in the eastern part of Ethiopia.

    (DOCX)

    pone.0300417.s001.docx (35.5KB, docx)
    S1 File

    (SAV)

    pone.0300417.s002.sav (111.3KB, sav)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Rebuttal letter.docx

    pone.0300417.s003.docx (26.8KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Rebuttal letter.docx

    pone.0300417.s004.docx (27.9KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and it’s supporting information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES